MLB getting rid of coin flips

by SC on Nov 7, 2008 12:06 PM EST in News Comment 28 comments

Rather than heads or tails, baseball general managers plan to recommend that sites for division and wild-card tiebreakers be decided by wins and losses.

"The team that performed better against the other team I think is the one that deserves to have home-field advantage, not an arbitrary coin flip," San Diego Padres general manager Kevin Towers said Thursday as the annual GMs meeting ended.

MLB staff is drafting a proposal for the GMs to consider next month when they gather at the winter meetings in Las Vegas, according to Jimmie Lee Solomon, executive vice president of baseball operations in the commissioner’s office. Head-to-head record between the tied clubs appears likely to be the first tiebreaker.

"I think it’s better to decide it on the field," Texas Rangers GM Jon Daniels said.

Wow. No kidding. I would even go so radical as to not assign home field advantage in the World Series on the outcome of the freaking ALL-STAR GAME, where nobody present cares what they're doing past not getting hurt, but hey, baby steps toward sanity and actual results mattering instead of coin flips.

0 recs | Comment 28 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Seriously.

And how did we get into the whole “AS Game determines home-field advantage for the WS”?

More idiocy from Bud Selig, with an assist from Saintly Joe.

Because in the wake of a meaningless exhibition game (designed solely for the fans and determined solely by ballot box stuffing) in which they were forced to declare a tie, they decided that their midsummer frivolity looked a little too unimportant. And in the following weeks didn’t have the gonads to stand by their decision of saying “it’s all just a lark, folks!” .

So they huddled and had very important meetings and gravely announced that NEXT YEAR THE GAME WOULD MEAN SOMETHING.

And now it does. It stands as a bellweather moments for the further ruination of the American pasttime.

Thanks, Bud, for one of your stupidest decisions ever.

by zknower on Nov 7, 2008 12:20 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

the game used to mean something

"This world extends way beyond this little field of dreams we're dancing in and I want to see that world"

by exitfare on Nov 7, 2008 1:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Back when the meaning wasn't forced

Now, there’s only a few guys on each team that care.

Duck Around - a progressive blob about the Eastern Shore of Maryland. And getting off my lawn.

by duck on Nov 8, 2008 9:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Back before Dane Cook

"This world extends way beyond this little field of dreams we're dancing in and I want to see that world"

by exitfare on Nov 10, 2008 9:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

How someone could come up with that resolution for calling a game a tie is still beyond me.

"Hey Yankees... you can take your apology and your trophy and shove 'em straight up your ass!" --Tanner Boyle

by BirdFanInPhilly on Nov 7, 2008 1:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Making the outcome of the ASG

determine home field is as superficial as all the complaints about it. It’s just something for people who like to be sanctimonious to be sanctimonious about. So I guess in that way it is annoying.

by Awesome Mike Awesome on Nov 7, 2008 2:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

to be honest

I kind of like that the AS game determines home field advantage. But then again, I love the All Star Game, so I might be a little biased.

by PhilR8 on Nov 7, 2008 2:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

whatever, dude. thanks for another nonsensical-yet-maligning comment.

by zknower on Nov 7, 2008 5:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

(directed at AMA, not PhilR8)

by zknower on Nov 7, 2008 5:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

How is that nonsensical?

Except in that you have nothing to say in response. The ASG determining home field has no negligible effect on anything and yet people complain because they like to. Seems pretty simple to me. Dude.

by Awesome Mike Awesome on Nov 7, 2008 7:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I just think it's fuckin' stupid

The team with the better record should have home field advantage, like the NBA and NHL.

"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum

Camden Chat
Bad Left Hook

by SC on Nov 8, 2008 6:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It is stupid

but it hardly affects anything enough to warrant all these gasbags spouting off year after year.

by Awesome Mike Awesome on Nov 8, 2008 7:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

that's fair

"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum

Camden Chat
Bad Left Hook

by SC on Nov 8, 2008 10:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

sigh.

“No negligible effect on anything”. I don’t even know what this means. Do you mean “a negligible effect”? Do you mean “no measureable effect”? “No negligible effect” makes no sense.

“It’s just something for people who like to be sanctimonious to be sanctimonious about.” You back this up how? Hey everyone, I can take any issue under the sun that you care about and just say it’s only for sanctimonious people to be sanctimonious about. Without explaining why. Do you care about Prop 8 in CA? Well, you’re just being sanctimonious! Think it’s better to have decaf then full caffeine in the morning if you have a heart condition? How sanctimonious of you! But it’s okay, you’re within your First Amendment rights. Don’t quote the First Amendment to me, though, I’ll accuse you of being sanctimonious!

Nonsensical=this one: “Making the outcome of the ASG determine home field is as superficial as all the complaints about it.” Saying the first half of your analogy (having the outcome determine HFA) is “superficial” is itself a complaint. So you’re complaining about it while saying commplaints about it are superficial. Nonsensical.

“People complain because they like to.” Ahahahaha! Coming from you, this is rich! I get it, it’s IRONY, right?

Good day, sir.

by zknower on Nov 9, 2008 3:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

God

"No negligible effect" makes no sense.

I’ll rephrase for you. The All Star Game determining home field advantage has no significant consequences. We now have six years of evidence — whom has it hurt, exactly?

"Do you care about Prop 8 in CA? Well, you’re just being sanctimonious! "

Really? That’s a law that affects people’s rights. Home field advantage in the World Series, on the other hand…

“Think it’s better to have decaf then full caffeine in the morning if you have a heart condition?”

Well that could have a serious effect on a person’s health. Home field advantage in the World Series, on the other hand…

But it’s okay, you’re within your First Amendment rights. Don’t quote the First Amendment to me, though, I’ll accuse you of being sanctimonious!

Lord.

Saying the first half of your analogy (having the outcome determine HFA) is "superficial" is itself a complaint.

I’m afraid it’s not. When I say superficial (and this should really be quite easy to surmise, but for you I make an exception, as you clearly have some unique challenges) I mean, again, in big capital letters, IT AFFECTS NO ONE IN ANY SIGNIFICANT WAY. So then who cares? WHY care? You’d think listening to people — people like you, say — every time this comes up that cats and dogs were sleeping together and the integrity of something or other has been compromised. So again, I ask you, after six years, what the fuck has happened to make this worth whining about? It’s just a dopey marketing scheme! BFD already.

by Awesome Mike Awesome on Nov 9, 2008 4:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks, Lord High Arbiter of What Matters

First off: Six years is hardly a convincing sample. The fact remains that one of these years, it will make a difference. It stands to reason that in a game whose actual rules give an advantage to the home team by letting them bat last, giving that advantage arbitrarily is going to penalize a team. It will matter when we get a World Series between two very-evenly matched teams, à la the incredible Braves-Twins series of ’91, where the home team won all seven games, and where three of the games went into extra innings. Sooner or later, it will matter.

And I don’t have to prove that to you or anyone else. It’s what I believe, therefore I care, and therefore, you can fuck off if you think it’s not worth caring about, because I never asked for your opinion of what matters in this world.

Seriously, Mike, why do you feel a reason to go picking fights with people and calling them names out of the blue? It’s staggering how far you go out of your way to start up shit with people. I’m sure you’ll follow this up with some more name-calling and rejoinders which mock me or attribute some shit to me that I haven’t said.

It’s just so tiresome. I don’t come onto this blog to be provoked or to get my blood pressure up. I imagine most people don’t. So why in God’s name can’t you exercise a little restraint and/or tact?

by zknower on Nov 9, 2008 9:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It will matter when we get a World Series between two very-evenly matched teams, à la the incredible Braves-Twins series of ’91, where the home team won all seven games, and where three of the games went into extra innings.

You mean when home field was determined by the staggering fact of odd and even numbers?

Seriously, Mike, why do you feel a reason to go picking fights with people and calling them names out of the blue?

THIS is what happened? Good heavens.

I’m sure you’ll follow this up with some more name-calling and rejoinders which mock me or attribute some shit to me that I haven’t said.

You said, “It stands as a bellweather moments for the further ruination of the American pasttime.” I’m taking the apparently offensive stance of asking how on earth this is RUINING anything. You can’t answer — probably because it’s NOT ruining anything — and so instead you take…this approach. Well done?

by Awesome Mike Awesome on Nov 10, 2008 5:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

further ruination, meaning it’s taking baseball in the wrong direction, not the right one. another one of those modifiers you seem to overlook. The AS tie-break is not ruining baseball; bud selig is, and this is a typical decision for him. is that really so unclear?

You mean when home field was determined by the staggering fact of odd and even numbers?
I never defended the way it used to be done. Alternating years wasn’t a good system either. I just think this system is worse.

I’m taking the apparently offensive stance of asking how on earth this is RUINING anything

No, your stance is not offensive. Asking how it’s ruining anything is not offensive. Arguing that it’s ruining nothing at all is not offensive.

Offensive to me is: 1) calling my complaints superficial 2) calling me sanctimonious 3) implying that I complain just because I like to 4) saying I have “unique challenges”

Look, I know teh Internets are not tea-and-crumpets, and that people are going to argue vociferiously for what they believe. And I support that. In fact, I’m one of those people. And I also respect your knowledge of the game and think you make great points a lot of the time. I just realy, REALLY wish you’d leave the personal attacks out of it.

by zknower on Nov 10, 2008 9:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

further ruination, meaning it’s taking baseball in the wrong direction, not the right one.

How? Until you can give me an example of how this has affected ANYTHING — like ten posts deep asking this question and you’ve not answered it once — then I’ll continue to think this position is superficial and your attitude about it is sanctimonious. I’m sorry saying all those things offends you — but then I guess you can fuck off, which is evidently acceptable by your standards.

by Awesome Mike Awesome on Nov 11, 2008 6:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

shorter version of this argument

me: i think it takes baseball in the wrong direction.

you: a) it doesn’t matter to anyone. b) prove it, asshole

me: it matters to me. i don’t have to PROVE it. it’s an opinion, not a fact.

you: you still didn’t prove it, gasbag. you must not understand me, you special needs person.

me: you’ve insulted me enough times, so i’ll tell you to fuck off. it’s not at all the same as calling you names, but you’ll pretend they’re somehow equivalent. i’ll also try to tell you why i have come to my opinion which, again, isn’t something that can be proven.

you: you still didn’t prove it. why didn’t you prove it?

lather, rinse, repeat

by zknower on Nov 11, 2008 12:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Oy

you: a) it doesn’t matter to anyone. b) prove it, asshole

Didn’t say a), and I certainly didn’t say b). I’m sorry I’m asking you to explain HOW something YOU SAY is leading to the “further ruination,” whatever the fuck that means, of baseball,is in fact doing so.

me: it matters to me. i don’t have to PROVE it. it’s an opinion, not a fact.

You’re right — it’s certainly not a fact. Why can’t you just say YOU DON’T LIKE IT. Why does it have to RUIN anything? Why be so dramatic? Are you still not seeing how this is a totally superficial complaint? You believe it and can’t even explain why!

me: you’ve insulted me enough times, so i’ll tell you to fuck off. it’s not at all the same as calling you names, but you’ll pretend they’re somehow equivalent.

Really? Please tell me which names I’ve called you in this thread. What’s the point, though — this is totally irrational. But now that I know your standards, fuck off ten times.

by Awesome Mike Awesome on Nov 11, 2008 1:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Seriously, Mike, why do you feel a reason to go picking fights with people and calling them names out of the blue?

“You are dense.” One of my favorite AMA to birdman exchanges.

Zartan says, "Sign Dan Johnson."

by birdman on Nov 10, 2008 12:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

In the interest of fairness

Brenley deserves an assist as well.

Agree on the main point though, it’s a stupid way to determine home field in the Series

You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever.

by sluggo 2.0 on Nov 8, 2008 10:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I feel dumber after reading that

“The team that performed better against the other team I think is the one that deserves to have home-field advantage, not an arbitrary coin flip,”

“I think it’s better to decide it on the field,”

I beg to differ!

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Nov 7, 2008 3:21 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I thought they played the games on paper...

Duck Around - a progressive blob about the Eastern Shore of Maryland. And getting off my lawn.

by duck on Nov 8, 2008 9:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

No

As Craig Kilborn (or was it Kenny Mayne?) told us, “They’re played inside our TV sets”.

You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever.

by sluggo 2.0 on Nov 8, 2008 10:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think the Milwaukee Brewers weenie race

should determine it

"This world extends way beyond this little field of dreams we're dancing in and I want to see that world"

by exitfare on Nov 7, 2008 6:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I think

they should get the fattest relievers on both team, have them sit at a table at a neutral location, and each one drinks a bottle of ipecac. However holds their vomit longer, their team wins home field advantage. I am willing to bet my late child support that this would garner higher TV ratings than any draft. And imagine when teams would start getting serious for this. There would be fat, old relievers getting contracts just for their ability to not vomit. Think of the crazy, late season trades!!!

"When they get drafted by the Baltimore Ravens, we expect them to play like that. Are we surprised? No."

by UMBC Oriole fan on Nov 10, 2008 10:39 PM EST reply actions 0 recs